or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

K2 Sidestashes

post #1 of 8
Thread Starter 

Alright so a lingering question for me...

I'm 165 cm and 135 lbs. I've demoed some kind of 170 Salomon carvers, the BBRs, Lords, I've rented some Atomic carvers in 154 to race slalom on, got some 163 K2 apache raiders, so I've pretty much never tried a wide ski like the K2 Sidestashes before.

 

In late February, before the end of February storms, I was at Kirkwood and they were demoing K2 Sidestashes. This was on that weekend where the snow did not soften after a 40-60 degree week so it was pretty frozen and icy. I picked up some mid 170 length sidestash skis, 100+ underfoot, and had a miserable 2 runs on them... yet I hear rave reviews about them.

 

When I carved, they hooked an edge and it was extremely tough to get off that edge and get it to go in the other direction. I had to force it a lot to go in a desired direction and it wasn't fun, obviously, with that super long turn radius as I wasn't feeling like ripping long GS turns that took over the entire trail on a crowded Zachary or Sentinel Bowl.

 

Now's my questions:

Was the length too long?

Am I just not used to such a wide ski or different ski?

Or are the skis just not meant for those conditions? (well clearly, they are best in powder, but I did see some other rockin dudes on wide skis and it was all hardpack)

 

Thanks,

Ski

post #2 of 8

I'm 6' (not sure how many cm that is) 175 and ski on 181's.  I haven't had the problem you've had --I like them on firm and in powder, crud, cement, etc--but then I tend to skid so maybe they work for me because of the way I ski.  I find them pretty turny for such a wide ski.  

post #3 of 8
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldgoat View Post

I'm 6' (not sure how many cm that is) 175 and ski on 181's.  I haven't had the problem you've had --I like them on firm and in powder, crud, cement, etc--but then I tend to skid so maybe they work for me because of the way I ski.  I find them pretty turny for such a wide ski.  



Yeah... it's like the skis are meant for skidding. I don't want to skid... I want to carve. Digging in an edge resulted in a super long turn and a weird sense of balance. It was very easy to just want to slide around... but that's not a good turn.

post #4 of 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiking4 View Post


 

When I carved, they hooked an edge and it was extremely tough to get off that edge and get it to go in the other direction. I had to force it a lot to go in a desired direction and it wasn't fun, obviously, with that super long turn radius as I wasn't feeling like ripping long GS turns that took over the entire trail on a crowded Zachary or Sentinel Bowl.

 


All signs of  bad tune, i bet there were  edge burs which would give all the symptoms that you had. Causes the ski to lock on the edge and you have to be really physical to change direction, edge transitions are anything but smooth.

 

post #5 of 8
Quote:
Originally Posted by skiking4 View Post

Alright so a lingering question for me...

I'm 165 cm and 135 lbs. I've demoed some kind of 170 Salomon carvers, the BBRs, Lords, I've rented some Atomic carvers in 154 to race slalom on, got some 163 K2 apache raiders, so I've pretty much never tried a wide ski like the K2 Sidestashes before.

 

In late February, before the end of February storms, I was at Kirkwood and they were demoing K2 Sidestashes. This was on that weekend where the snow did not soften after a 40-60 degree week so it was pretty frozen and icy. I picked up some mid 170 length sidestash skis, 100+ underfoot, and had a miserable 2 runs on them... yet I hear rave reviews about them.

 

When I carved, they hooked an edge and it was extremely tough to get off that edge and get it to go in the other direction. I had to force it a lot to go in a desired direction and it wasn't fun, obviously, with that super long turn radius as I wasn't feeling like ripping long GS turns that took over the entire trail on a crowded Zachary or Sentinel Bowl.

 

Now's my questions:

Was the length too long?

Am I just not used to such a wide ski or different ski?

Or are the skis just not meant for those conditions? (well clearly, they are best in powder, but I did see some other rockin dudes on wide skis and it was all hardpack)

 

 

Thanks,

Ski


At 135 pounds, you were too light for the skis.  I weigh 170 pounds, and I feel that the 174 length in that ski is right for me.  You would had skied better on the 167 size.

 

Were you used to a ski such as that?  Probably not.  Everything that you skied on has a whole lot more shape.  The Sidestashes have a turn radius of 21 meters or larger.

 

I skied my personal 108mm width skis in those conditions at Heavenly that week.  No issues there.

 

Dennis

post #6 of 8

Any suggestions on K2 SideStash size?  I'm 6'2", 185lbs, skiing mostly out east, but buying these for the occasional trip I get our west with some deeper powder (fingers crossed).  Love trees, bumps, etc. already have some frontside skis.

post #7 of 8

To the OP--the natural turn radius of that ski is quite long, as you noticed.  A ski can be made to carve at a much tighter radius, if you're heavy enough, on edge enough, and going fast enough to bend the ski.  That was the only way to carve in the bad old days. Obviously carving short radius turns on hardpack is not what the Sidestash is made for.  You might have been happier on a shorter Sidestash but you still would have probably been unhappy with the turn radius.  That said I didn't see a whole lot of people having much on any kind of ski last February in the Sierras. (I was still on my rock skis--didn't get out the Sidestashes until March.) 

post #8 of 8

174 or 167 cm sounds like a reasonable length for someone at your size, but your expectations seems a bit off.

Quote:
Originally Posted by skiking4 View Post



Yeah... it's like the skis are meant for skidding. I don't want to skid... I want to carve. Digging in an edge resulted in a super long turn and a weird sense of balance. It was very easy to just want to slide around... but that's not a good turn.

Some of that feeling might just be the turn radius of the skis compared to what you are used to. I bet you might have felt the same on a >27 m turn radius  FIS-approved GS ski under the same conditions, but claiming that those skis are not made for good skiing on icy groomers would seem like an unreasonable claim;)

Icy groomers full of people are the worst possible conditions for a long radius offpiste ski. I too really enjoy my slalom skis in those kind of conditions. But in other conditions, a ski like the sidestash will feel totally appropriate. You should try them again on soft untracked corn with a bit of attitude in the surface (a bit firmer surface, but soft enough underneath to sink in) on a big open slope. On a ski like the sidestash in those conditions, you can just ski GS-turns almost like you would on your racecarvers on a groomer, using a reasonable amount of edge angle and outside ski dominance, in what will feel and look like carving in soft snow. The softer snow will easen the turn radius since the skis get bended into the soft snow. If you tried those conditions on your narrow, short radius race carvers, they would be the skis that would encourage ugly survival skiing ;-)

I might be reading a bit too much into your post, but it seems like you distinquish good and bad skiing by pure carving vs skidding. There is a lot more to it than that, and in my mind the difference between good and bad skidding is equally important. I think that skiing long radius skis in short radius turns while maintaining good form, is a very good exercise to do to get better at skiing.

The skiers in the video below are not doing pure carving, but it still looks like good albeit mellow skiing:

http://vimeo.com/16748980
 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion